Pharaoh V3

Rejected venues wait the longest for re-review; a rejection has to earn another look before the scheduled date.

Pharaoh is a concentrated-liquidity exchange on the Avalanche C-Chain using a ve(3,3)-style incentive model. Concentrated liquidity sharpens the core AMM problem: a provider’s position converts into the weaker asset whenever price leaves the chosen range, and the loss is realised on exit. That impermanent loss cannot be explained to a mass-affluent client in two sentences, which is why we reject the whole liquidity-provision category regardless of how well a given exchange is built. Pharaoh held $7.8M across 7 pools at the August 14, 2026 survey.

Kill criteria: the events that revoke this verdict
• Ships a product line without impermanent-loss exposure that merits its own review

The research file

Applicability to the surveyed record

Pharaoh documents its Avalanche deployment as an orderbook-style concentrated-liquidity AMM modeled on Uniswap V3: LPs allocate a token pair inside selected tick ranges, with narrower ranges increasing capital efficiency and impermanent-loss and out-of-range risk. This directly establishes the AMM-LP class rather than relying on the protocol label alone.

Current observation and perimeter

The DefiLlama protocol API read on 2026-08-15 classified Pharaoh V3 as a DEX, reported only Avalanche, and showed approximately $13.42M TVL. Size is contextual because the shared v1 AMM-LP exclusion applies regardless of venue scale.

Control and exit applicability

LPs choose pair, fee tier, and price range, while price path changes the position inventory and a tighter range creates more impermanent-loss and out-of-range risk. Pharaoh states pools are immutable and permissionless and privileged roles cannot remove user liquidity, although operators can manage gauges and a fee setter can change pair fees; the investor still exits the LP position into its then-current token inventory.

Why the class rule decides

The shared v1 AMM-LP dossier controls because Pharaoh V3 fee and incentive returns require path-dependent two-asset liquidity exposure. Reopen only for an economically separate Pharaoh product without AMM inventory, then review its mechanism, contracts and admin controls, Avalanche and asset dependencies, audits and incidents, executable liquidity, stressed exit, and named non-AMM alternatives.

Sources

The claims above trace to these. Where a number could not be independently verified, the thesis says so.

• Pharaoh — concentrated liquidity · primary · accessed 2026-08-15
  Supports: Avalanche AMM, price ranges, tick ranges, impermanent loss, out-of-range risk, fee tiers
• Pharaoh — security design principles · primary · accessed 2026-08-15
  Supports: immutable pools, permissionless liquidity, multisig and timelock, gauge control, swap-fee control, withdrawal authority limits
• DefiLlama — Pharaoh V3 survey record · secondary · accessed 2026-08-15
  Supports: current TVL, Avalanche perimeter, DEX category, survey observation

Inherited controls

The verdict above grades the protocol layer. Every position also inherits the asset it holds and the chain it settles on. The least safe layer sets the position’s grade, and the position table names which one that is.